Urban lifestyle is causing the extinction of our ability to experience nature; Is it possible to create cities that are good for us and good for nature?
By SHIKMA ZAARUR / ZAVITStrolling in Jerusalem’s Sacher Park on a sunny day(photo credit: MARC ISRAEL SELLEM)
Spending time in nature has health benefits and increases our overall well-being, yet of the 7.4 billion people inhabiting Earth, more than half live in cities, separated from nature.Studies show that people today, particularly children, do not have regular direct contact with nature, and for many, “real nature” is replaced with virtual alternatives.This separation can cause a new kind of extinction – of our experience of nature.Can nature be incorporated into our cities? Is it feasible to prevent this extinction through eco-oriented city planning? These questions are at the core of a recent study by Prof. Assaf Shwartz of the Faculty of Architecture and Town Planning at the Technion. In a study published in the Israeli scientific journal Ecology & Environment, Shwartz examines approaches for incorporating green spaces in urban development, costs and ecological impact. Beyond that, he questions our ability as city dwellers to connect to nature and appreciate our parks and the nature we think they preserve.What is this nature we wish to protect and how is it affected by cities? The natural environment is habitat to a network of organisms from soil bacteria and bugs to big trees and larger animals that rely on one another to live and grow. Like the organs that make up a human body, together they form an ecological system.When one is removed or overgrows, the system can collapse. Urban development physically destroys and fragments natural habitats, which often results in the collapse of the ecological system and the loss of biological diversity.It is clear that the development of cities is devastating for nature and results in the rapid extinction of many species. But what about us? According to Shwartz, city lifestyle and the diminishing natural systems contribute to a separation between us and our ability to experience nature, in what is referred to by lepidopterist (moth/butterfly expert) Prof. Robert Pyle as “the extinction of experience.” Could it be that alongside the extinction of plants and animals, the decrease in biological diversity and the destruction of ecosystems, our urban lifestyle also results in an extinction of our ability to experience those things? Studies show that green spaces in cities are good for our health and well-being; but little is known about the way in which biodiversity in the urban setting – having a variety of organisms – actually affects us. One study found that people reported a higher quality of life when they thought biodiversity in their surrounding environment was high, regardless of whether it was true. What mattered was the perceived rather than actual diversity. The fact that people could not identify the species they saw did not matter either, what mattered was that they felt nature was there – a kind of biodiversity placebo effect.Why is it that we want the diversity even if we cannot recognize it? This paradox is explained by two theories. The “biophilia” (nature-loving) theory argues that humans evolved in natural environments and consequently developed a mental-social dependence on them; we instinctively feel good in nature and want it around us. For us to maintain this connection with nature, however, according to this theory, we need ongoing engagement with it.On the other hand, according to the “experience of extinction” theory, city life separates us from nature, causing us to lose our ability to experience it and its complexity. In the long run, this could result in our losing the ability to appreciate the existence of nature and care for it. Preventing the extinction of the nature experience should therefore be one of the key goals and challenges in developing sustainable cities for the mutual benefit of people and biodiversity conservation.When it comes to eco-urban planning, according to Shwartz, the two main concepts are “land sharing” and “land sparing.” Sharing the space means we incorporate “green lungs” in the urban environment, such as private and public gardens and parks. These green spaces can serve as urban wildlife habitats that increase the biodiversity in the city, have health benefits, increase our overall well-being and help us stay connected to nature. These parks can also serve as ecological corridors that allow natural populations to cross the city and thus reduce habitat fragmentation.That may sound like a win-win situation.However, these settings can result in ecological traps where animals inhabit the space but in the long run cannot sustain their existence in it. While these ecological corridors reduce habitat fragmentation, they are not effective for all species. Locally, land sharing lowers the biological damage in the city, but from a larger ecological perspective, it translates into sprawling cities that disturb large areas.The alternative to land sharing is land sparing. In this approach, cities and neighborhoods are built densely with the green spaces around or near them rather than within them. This results in adverse ecological damage at the local scale with near complete destruction of local habitat. It separates us from nature and deprives us of the benefits of being close to nature. However, because land sparing translates into cities that are built up rather than spread out, it reduces habitat destruction and fragmentation, leaves larger areas outside the city untouched and results in an overall smaller ecological damage.Addressing our growing population needs while ensuring both our well-being and the needs of nature is a great challenge to urban planners. Perhaps the ideal lies between the two approaches, says Shwartz, for while we should bear in mind that city gardens might not conserve pristine natural habitats and preserve the whole ecosystem, they contribute to our well-being. From the ecological perspective, perhaps more importantly, these city parks provide us the opportunity to experience nature and keep us connected to it, so that the nature experience will not turn into fairytale- like “land far away.”The writer, a PhD, completed her academic training at MIT and Yale University in Earth sciences. This article was written under the auspices of Zavit – Science and Environment News Agency.
Related Tagsisrael nature
if(catID != 151){
var cont = `Take Israel home with the new Jerusalem Post Store